Ten Things Every ESL Teacher Should Know (Eamer, 2009)posted by Allyson
Below you'll find an excerpt from Eamer's article in which she describes the most effective ways to provide corrective feedback. She claims that the literature shows that explicit feedback is more effective than the recast (repeating the student's utterance but with the error corrected).
However, Coehlo in her interview with the Toronto Star seems to be saying something different. She says "Refrain from continually correcting students who make mistakes in their use of language and instead model back to them the way they should have phrased something." Isn't this contradictory? How can they both be right? Please comment in about 250 words. Include a description of your own instinctive response to the matter of correcting the English language learner's mistakes as well as your feelings about Eamer's and Coelho's position on this issue. Please also provide links to any sites, documents or video clips that will help us to fully understand this important question.
Here is a good example of a relevant link: http://esl.about.com/od/esleflteachingtechnique/i/i_correction.htm
Please also remember to provide your name at the top of your post.
Here is the excerpt from Eamer's article: Give corrective feedback It is a popular misconception that it is counterproductive for language learners to have their errors explicitly pointed out to them. The argument that ongoing corrective feedback is demoralizing and results in the learner choosing to generate briefer and more simplistic utterances in order to avoid ‘getting it wrong’ may seem compelling, but it is in fact erroneous. Well-intended teachers have opted for very indirect feedback, believing it to be less inhibiting. Consider the following approaches to providing feedback when an error is made. Teacher: Did you go anywhere this past weekend? Learner: Yes I goed to visit my friend at her house. Teacher: Oh you WENT to visit your friend? That’s great. Learner: Yes and we watched a movie. This is called a ‘recast’ when a teacher reiterates the student’s utterance but replaces the error with the corrected version. The hope is that the student will be alerted to the difference between his/her own utterance and the teacher’s corrected one, and will adjust the grammar accordingly in future utterances of the same type. Research shows however that this type of feedback is not very effective in ensuring that future errors of the same type are eliminated or even reduced. The most effective means of accomplishing that goal is to explicitly and gently point out the error, and request that a corrected utterance be made. Teacher: Did you go anywhere this past weekend? Learner: Yes I goed to visit my friend at her house. Teacher: Actually, some verbs called irregular verbs, do not take the "ed" in past tense. The verb ‘to go’ is one of those irregular verbs; so instead of saying ‘I goed’ you would have to say ‘I WENT to visit my friend’. Try that, please. Learner: Oh okay. I WENT to visit my friend at her house… and we watched a movie. This type of explicit feedback has been shown in various studies to be the most likely to ensure uptake of the required knowledge and to ensure modifications are made to future use of the same structure. For more on this topic you may wish to read Lightbown, P.M., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press. *Especially chapter 5
Below you'll find an excerpt from Eamer's article in which she describes the most effective ways to provide corrective feedback. She claims that the literature shows that explicit feedback is more effective than the recast (repeating the student's utterance but with the error corrected).
However, Coehlo in her interview with the Toronto Star seems to be saying something different. She says "Refrain from continually correcting students who make mistakes in their use of language and instead model back to them the way they should have phrased something." Isn't this contradictory? How can they both be right? Please comment in about 250 words. Include a description of your own instinctive response to the matter of correcting the English language learner's mistakes as well as your feelings about Eamer's and Coelho's position on this issue. Please also provide links to any sites, documents or video clips that will help us to fully understand this important question.
Here is a good example of a relevant link:
http://esl.about.com/od/esleflteachingtechnique/i/i_correction.htm
Please also remember to provide your name at the top of your post.
Here is the excerpt from Eamer's article:
Give corrective feedback
It is a popular misconception that it is counterproductive for language learners to have their errors explicitly pointed out to them. The argument that ongoing corrective feedback is demoralizing and results in the learner choosing to generate briefer and more simplistic utterances in order to avoid ‘getting it wrong’ may seem compelling, but it is in fact erroneous.
Well-intended teachers have opted for very indirect feedback, believing it to be less inhibiting. Consider the following approaches to providing feedback when an error is made.
Teacher: Did you go anywhere this past weekend?
Learner: Yes I goed to visit my friend at her house.
Teacher: Oh you WENT to visit your friend? That’s great.
Learner: Yes and we watched a movie.
This is called a ‘recast’ when a teacher reiterates the student’s utterance but replaces the error with the corrected version. The hope is that the student will be alerted to the difference between his/her own utterance and the teacher’s corrected one, and will adjust the grammar accordingly in future utterances of the same type. Research shows however that this type of feedback is not very effective in ensuring that future errors of the same type are eliminated or even reduced. The most effective means of accomplishing that goal is to explicitly and gently point out the error, and request that a corrected utterance be made.
Teacher: Did you go anywhere this past weekend?
Learner: Yes I goed to visit my friend at her house.
Teacher: Actually, some verbs called irregular verbs, do not take the "ed" in past tense. The verb ‘to go’ is one of those irregular verbs; so instead of saying ‘I goed’ you would have to say ‘I WENT to visit my friend’. Try that, please.
Learner: Oh okay. I WENT to visit my friend at her house… and we watched a movie.
This type of explicit feedback has been shown in various studies to be the most likely to ensure uptake of the required knowledge and to ensure modifications are made to future use of the same structure.
For more on this topic you may wish to read
Lightbown, P.M., & Spada, N. (2006).
How languages are learned
(3rd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press. *Especially chapter 5